Mastering AutoCAD Civil 3D 2011, the official Autodesk-endorsed guide to Civil 3D co-written by Scott McEachron of I.II.I, is now available. This book includes what students, professionals, Subject Matter Experts, and AE’s need to pass the Civil 3D 2011 Certified Associate and Certified Professional exams.

This Autodesk Official Training Courseware used by Autodesk Resellers world-wide to teach Civil 3D covers all the key concepts, the software interface, and the best methods for creating, editing, displaying, and labeling all the elements of a civil engineering or land surveying project.

The book features in-depth, detailed coverage of surveying, points, alignments, surfaces, profiles, corridors, grading, LandXML and LDT Project Transfer, cross sections, pipe networks, visualization, sheets, and project management.

Mastering AutoCAD Civil 3D 2011 is a complete course in the real-world application of Civil 3D as well as the ultimate study guide for certification and is available online through Amazon.com.

For more information about the book, or for help in planning your Civil 3D Implementation & Training programs, contact Scott McEachron at scott.mceachron@121pcs.net.

©2010 Paving the Way. All Rights Reserved.

“I walked through your tip on setting colors, linetypes, etc. to “byblock”. I understood your purpose was to allow the novice
Civil 3D user to quickly becoming a productive CAD operator in the Civil 3D environment. But if I carry your suggestion to
set alignments and the other objects which are normally style-controlled as to their appearance, and set them to “byblock,”
I’m left with a drawing with most of my drawing elements on layer zero. Most firms have set layer names and standards
To be used and there’s the National CAD standards to be considered as well. If I only make the change to some of my drawing elements, I have drawing of a mixed bag & the novice will still have to learn the styles in interact successfully with all elements.

Why Is not better to train the novice to use the company standard styles from the beginning?”

My Response:
My point was, using this setting is just one method for simplifying an implementation that uses the RDI approach.

There are essentially 2 ways to introduce Civil 3D and it’s more of a Psychology game than anything. You’re not simply introducing new software, you’ll have to learn to manage change for adults with various learning styles, and you have essentially two choices:

1. Build a template with styles and teach the firm, or a team within the firm, to learn new layers and styles. This is more of the Assess, Plan, Solve, Confirm approach I eluded to. If you have a small firm, say under 20 users, this may work, but you’ll need everyone (including decision makers) on board, and it will take roughly a year to be fully implemented. I’m working with a firm in Houston using this approach with roughly 25 users, it has taken them 18 months to be fully implemented and away from Land Desktop. Some very large public organizations have been attempting this method for over 2 years. Generally this approach has about a 40% chance of succeeding. This is a more rigid approach using the Assess, Plan, Solve, Confirm method that fails 50% – 75% of the time.

2. Find a business issue to resolve and roll out Civil 3D tools as needed. Introduce tools you know will increase production immediately. That’s the point of the RDI approach. There aren’t any rules governing how or when to leave old software behind; there are no rules governing how many flavors of software you use. So find a tool, or a few tools, implement them, look for quick wins to build confidence in the software, and allow the implementation to proceed naturally. That’s how we implemented AutoCAD in the early days – we drew and plotted what we could in AutoCAD, inked the rest by hand, used sticky-backs for legal descriptions and location maps, and learned a little at a time, at our own pace. That’s how we implemented DCA, Softdesk, and Land Desktop as well – we did what we could using tools that worked, did the rest using common sense and a few basic skills. Slow and Steady, that’s the RDI (Results Driven Incrementalism) approach and it works every time.

I usually begin an implementation with a single tool – terrain modeling, and I’ve taught the approach at Autodesk University. DTM in Civil 3D is much more robust that Land Desktop (or any other tool on the market), it’s easy to learn, you’ll have to study changing workflow and production methods (xref’s and dref’s are easier to learn on a small scale at first), and you’ll always have a way out – a DTM can be exported in a number of ways to any software.

You’re goal is obviously to roll out all of Civil 3D and leave other tools behind at some point, but if you try to do it all at once, you’ll pay a stiff price in downtime, training costs, lost production, etc., (like trying to roll out pipe networks on a full scale to an entire firm). So what’s the goal of using settings like BYBLOCK? Limit style interaction, limit downtime, and limit the training required while your teams get comfortable with Civil 3D. It’s by far the best way to push out Civil 3D while learning to manage the changes that will come; that’s the RDI approach, and it works 100% of the time.

The following is from my first Civil 3D Implementation. It was also the first documented success story, and it happened with a firm that rolled out Civil 3D 2005 with a new template and 3 days of training:
Civil 3D Project Case Study: Adding another dimension

To answer your other concerns:
“I’m left with a drawing with most of my drawing elements on layer zero:”
That’s the point – and they can be changed with a right click and a trip to the AutoCAD Properties palette.

“Most firms have set layer names and standards”
Most firms *think* they do, but object layers in Civil 3D create a new level of complexity. Firms that have standards in place, generally have them in a manual – the manual will need to be re-written for Civil 3D. but if you roll out a little at a time, you can re-write as you learn new methods with Civil 3D.

“There’s the National CAD Standards to be considered”
It’s true there’s an NCS template; those using NCS will have an easier time understanding object layers vs. component layers. Firms implementing NCS for the first time have to learn not only a new layer naming scheme, but learn that changes to layer properties may not affect Civil 3D objects, and it depends on which objects, and for what purpose – and then how are x’refs handled? What happens to object layers and appearance if the drawings need to be exported? Both questions have to be addressed at some point.

“If I only make the change to some of my drawing elements, I have a mixed bag”
If you’ve built, and tried to force adoption, using a single template built before Civil 3D is fully adopted, that would be true. My point is, trying to build a template first, and then trying to implement Civil 3D on a full scale to all users has little chance of succeeding. Build a few styles, keep them simple, adopt Civil 3D a bit at a time and allow the users a chance to decide for themselves a little at a time that the new tools work well – you want them to beg for more, not gripe about what they were forced to use.

“Why is it not better to train the novice to use the company standard styles from the beginning?”
1. You’ll have turn-over. The users you teach today, will be gone tomorrow
2. You’ll have push-back from some users who don’t like the new method(s). If one user decides to go his/her own direction – which WILL happen when project deadlines loom, the process gets broken and you will have introduced an internal struggle unnecessarily.
3. The trained user base is still relatively small, count on spending a lot of money in downtime and training. The key to a good implementation is in knowing how to minimize each of those, but if you carefully decide what tools to roll out at what times and on what projects, you’ll have a much better chance of succeeding.
4. You can’t possibly train all new users on the new tools at the same time. If you build a full template, then train, then work on a pilot project, UNLESS you’ve chosen a few people on a single team or all the people in a SMALL firm, you’ll have a difficult time enforcing use as some just won’t “get” the new program, and will revert to old habits/old methods – so avoid that in the first place.
5. Adults learn in three key ways
a. Learn at their own pace
b. Prefer to learn as they go
c. Learn by doing

You can’t teach new users new methods and expect them to “get it” and apply the knowledge to a new project using new tools; it won’t happen. Find an instructor that understands the RDI approach, and can teach your users how to LEARN Civil 3D, not simply how to USE Civil 3D.

©2010 Paving the Way. All Rights Reserved.

Most of us learn to draw first and ask questions later. Once we have mastered AutoCAD® techniques, then we pay attention to drawing organization. This task is much more difficult in AutoCAD Civil 3D® because objects are controlled via object styles. It is hard to master design techniques in Civil 3D without understanding styles, but that is counterintuitive to the way most of us have learned.

If I could tell you just one secret to setting up styles in your organization, this one may be the Holy Grail. By using the BYBLOCK setting in Civil 3D styles to control colors and linetypes, the appearance of objects can be modified using the AutoCAD Properties palette. This makes it easy for a new user with limited AutoCAD experience to learn Civil 3D while abiding by organizational standards.

Modifying Default Styles
A common workflow in Civil 3D is to create an object, such as an alignment, using default style settings. If a Civil 3D template or templates have not yet been introduced to an organization, it is common to use those that exist in the template that ships with AutoCAD Civil 3D. Once an object has been drawn, a user can right-click on an object, select either Object Properties, or Edit Object Style, and modify the component display found on the Display tab as shown:

The example in the figure above was pulled from the “Existing” alignment style found in the _AutoCAD Civil 3D (Imperial) NCS.dwt drawing template. Notice how the layer names are somewhat unique, but the colors, linetypes, and lineweights are set to BYLAYER for each component. By working with styles configured in this fashion, which is common, a user must have at least some understanding of Civil 3D styles to modify the appearance of objects. However, the process of modifying object appearance can be tedious and time consuming for new Civil 3D users who are trained to use simple AutoCAD techniques (select an object, right click, change properties using the AutoCAD Properties Palette).

Controlling Appearance with the AutoCAD Properties Palette
A user working with AutoCAD Civil 3D® for the first time will almost instinctively select an object, open the properties palette, and change layers, colors, and linetypes accordingly. But if object visibility is controlled by a style configured as shown below in the Existing Alignment Style, changes to appearance in the Properties palette will have no effect; and confusion sets in.

BYBLOCK: The Big Secret
Using the alignment object as an example, If the object style were instead configured using a combination of layer 0 and a well-placed BYBLOCK setting, appearance could be controlled via the properties palette. For an alignment object, begin your new configuration by setting the object layer to 0 as shown:

Next, change the alignment object style so the color, linetype, and lineweight are each BYBLOCK as shown in the following figure:

By using a style configured in this fashion, the alignment object will respond to any changes to the layer, color, linetype, or lineweight as shown in the AutoCAD Properties Palette. And the same methodology applies to the station labels as well. Simply configure each label to appear on layer 0, and each component to use the BYBLOCK setting as shown in the following figures:

When creating styles for your organization, keep in mind they can be difficult to master. If your goal is to get your team thinking more about the Civil 3D design tools and less about object appearance, styles, colors, and the plethora of settings controlling each, this technique offers a powerful alternative. Keep this in mind during your implementation and you will make it much easier for a user with basic AutoCAD skills to harness the power of Civil 3D.

The Rest of the Story
After the above article was published, I received the following email from a friend (edited to protect confidentiality):

…Couldn’t quite get my head around what the data structure of the drawing ends up looking like if you follow this to logical conclusion, so discussed a bit with … guys who’ve done a fair bit of this … I wondered if you’d come across a new best practice … for template building.

Our initial conclusion seems to be that your BYBLOCK methodology makes it simple for the Civil 3D user to understand whilst designing, but could present a significant challenge when you want to share your drawing with a 3rd party, with just AutoCAD, or adhere to a submittal standard. I’d be interested in your thoughts and further discussion. Is it a case of a quick win for the new user only causing greater effort downstream?

Response
This practice (utilizing the BYBLOCK setting) came from implementing for private firms with widely accepted standards (both internally, and externally).

In order to implement Civil 3D “traditionally,” firms are taught to set up styles (we all know the length of time required to create a template based upon unique layer standards), teach the firm style organization/implementation/workflow, and hope it sticks. In reality, however, it’s difficult and costly to make “stick,” and becomes a stumbling block, at best, for new users. This is especially true in firms where AutoCAD experience alone is the norm, there is no time for training, and Civil 3D standardization documentation doesn’t exist – reality.

In practice, objects created using this methodology, when exported to earlier versions of AutoCAD, will retain the layer information and set color, linetype, etc. to their BYBLOCK setting (a color would become “color 42,” for example) which can be useful in plotting by STB. As an alternative, the SETBYLAYER command can be used to convert all entity information to BYLAYER – a practice those of us working with US DOT’s are used to for CTB plotting. BYBLOCK styles work through xref’s as well (colors, linetypes, etc. can be controlled via the layer properties palette – something all AutoCAD users understand).

Most submittal requirements for public agencies include ancient layer, color, and linetype standards. The standards are much easier to adhere to with these, what I would call, “flex” styles (styles using BYBLOCK settings).

Are there limitations? Absolutely. But look at the alternative: IMHO, solution providers have unfortunately backed, and in some cases taught, an implementation program that cripples private firms with little or no available funding. The ICE Program, which taught the Consultative Selling Process (“Assess, Plan, Solve, Confirm”) to technical experts was never intended to be, and should never have been relied upon as, an implementation technique – it is a well documented sales technique. Unfortunately, too many vendors bought into the notion of teaching their hired guns and rainmakers to sell pre-packaged implementation solutions that sounded credible (which is why the method is an exceptional sales technique), but lacked any true depth or purpose; using the Consultative Method as a software implementation technique is an adoption killer. We can talk about the causes all day, but I’ll leave it a this – you can build a Civil 3D template that contains every imaginable style and build a “custom training” program, but you can’t change the ways in which adults learn. And that’s what you need to tap into (conquering how adults learn and cope with change) if you plan to have a successful Civil 3D implementation.

If instead the RDI (Results Driven Incrementalism) model was used (implement software tools that resolve business issues and enhance productivity immediately), then flex styles could be implemented with little or no training, and it would take private firms much less time to implement; more widespread adoption in a shorter timeframe (therefore a quicker ROI) a clear and obvious benefit. It’s using this model private firms have had the greatest success implementing Civil 3D:

Results Driven Incrementalism (RDI) – An Incremental Process for Software Implementation

The Karate Kid
A friend reminded me the difference in approaches (Consultative Method vs. RDI) could be seen in the lessons from the movie “The Karate Kid:”

Daniel wanted to learn to fight, and he had two options: 1. Cobra Kai Dojo (Assess, Plan, Solve, Confirm – learn the tools, left brain only) or 2. Mr. Miyagi (Results Driven Incrementalism – learn to use the tools in the practice of a trade, think outside the box, left and right brain together).

Daniel had tried to learn Karate by reading books, and attending classes at the YMCA. While he learned some Karate moves, he didn’t learn the art of Karate. He ultimately found success with Mr. Miyagi’s plan, but his first lessons were waxing the car, painting the fence, sanding the floors, and more; seemingly unrelated, repetitive tasks. In the end, Daniel learned not only the physical skills necessary in the practice of Karate, but also the mental skills necessary to instinctively think outside the box, problem solve, and win – much more advanced training in much less time.

The Bottom Line
The RDI approach is broader, deeper and less time consuming. Therefore, it has a much greater impact, and is much less expensive. Anyone can teach your organization how to use Civil 3D. Unless you learn who, what, when, and why, any success you find will be short-lived.

©2010 Paving the Way. All Rights Reserved.

“Fixed” elements:
Elements of an alignment/profile object (tangent segment, curve segment, or spiral segment) that have no dependency on any other element.

“Floating” elements:
Elements of an alignment/profile object (tangent segment, curve segment, or spiral segment) that have a dependency on a previous OR subsequent element.

“Free” elements:
Elements of an alignment/profile object (tangent segment, curve segment) that have a dependency on the previous AND subsequent element.

©2010 Paving the Way. All Rights Reserved.

However, if a grid padding distance is specified in the profile view style, and if the station range is set to “user specified,” and if the profile view was created in Civil 3D 2009 (and perhaps 2010), then when the drawing is opened in Civil 3D 2011, the horizontal profile view grid lines may extend past the left and right profile view axiis for some distance. And there is a direct correlation between the distance of the overlap, the distance of grid padding, and the horizontal scale of the drawing.

How do you solve the problem of the overlapping lines you may find in the Civil 3D 2011 drawing? Set the grid padding distances to zero in the profile view style.

The I.II.I™ Consortium
Be Extraordinary.

©2010 Paving the Way. All Rights Reserved.

Included in the ten titles is Mastering AutoCAD Civil 3D 2011 co-written by myself and James Wedding.

Click Here for more information and to read the full story.

©2010 Paving the Way. All Rights Reserved.

Who in the Sam Hell invented the steering wheel, the nav bar, and the view cube? I got in a drawing this afternoon and found it was eating most of screen real estate. This thing – well it’s worse that waiting to stub your toe. Now mind you, there’s a setting for it – somewhere. NAVVCUBE command and you can turn it off from the command line, but that’s not the issue. The freakin’ thing comes back!

And trust me, I know there’s a setting to disable it forever, but should I really need to search for it? I think when you start AutoCAD you should be prompted with: “I’m about to turn on something that will annoy the bejeezers out of you – if you don’t feel like stubbing your toe on it, click here and we will remove it from your system, and every system you touch, until further notice, or the next release. Turning this off, will also permanently set GEOMARKERVISIBILITY off, in every drawing, forever and ever, amen.”

And I think that’s fair! But in the mean time, I’ve created a button on a tool palette – ’cause those I dig:

^C^C_navvcube;off;navbar;off;

©2010 Paving the Way. All Rights Reserved.

They each have their own little peculiarities, but I think by name alone you can figure out what they do. Be careful though, without an interface, and without options, using the commands will overwrite anything in your current drawing. But that may be just what you need.

Type the command and you’ll be prompted with (Windows 7): Enter path for template file MCEACHRON\appdata\local\autodesk\c3d 2011\enu\template>: You can type the name of a template (.dwt), or you can type the name of a drawing (.dwg).

Your screen will blink for a couple seconds, but then check out your Settings tab!

Again, the commands are undocumented and unsupported – Use them at your own risk of course, and test them before trying them in production. We’ve seen commands like this exposed in the past. And in many cases they lead to great things to come!

Cheers!

©2010 Paving the Way. All Rights Reserved.

©2010 Paving the Way. All Rights Reserved.

Civil 3D Tutorials at I.II.I one.to.one
AutoCAD^® Civil 3D^® Tutorials. Click Here for Registration Information.

©2010 Paving the Way. All Rights Reserved.